One thing that occures to me. This game seems very focused on cover and coutner tactics like supression. So how does the animal faction take advantage of that? So far they seem to be the guys that come in large numbers and just run into melee combat but that seems to be just the opposite of the way a game is supposed to go.

Do the animals have any core tactics they can use aside from cover? Anyone have any ideas on things the animal faction could employ to be more strategic without shoots spines or acid all over the place?

Well smoke screens and stealth, while valid ways to make the animals viable, both seem like special powers that units would have rather then core tactics available to every other army like supressive fire.

Kris Knives wrote:Well smoke screens and stealth, while valid ways to make the animals viable, both seem like special powers that units would have rather then core tactics available to every other army like supressive fire.

You're right, it doesn't seem like animals are going to use many core rules related to shooting. But they're going to have their own stuff, giving players the choice of something new.

The animals are the black sheep of the game since most of the other are shooting first and range second. At the moment there are no rules on melee combat so it hard to see what can be done with the animals.

Well it seems to me regardless of what the melee rules are every single animal needs a way to get into melee range. What if there were some special movement options that you could use as tactics?

Like what if a squad could split up and converge on a location (at the cost of not being able to attack until they meet up) so an opposing unit couldn't shoot at the whole squad at once?

So for example:

I have a squad of 9 animals trying to get at a squad of 9 reclaimers under cover. At my movement phase I split my squad temporarily into groups of three each moving towards the reclaimers from right, left and center. The reclaimers on their turn fire and wipe out the center group killing three of my animals. Then on my turn I move again reuniting my remaining six animals, flanking the enemy and attacking at melee range once they squad is formed up again.

This would give you some movement options to try and limit your losses while moving into melee range.

Yes in this instance I do mean like a wolf pack attack but the manuver could also be used in other ways. I don't see why it would need be a tactic only animals could use. It is a real tactic people as well as animals use in combat all the time.

The best example I can think of is in the movie Saving Private Ryan. The americans use this manuver to get at the machine gunner's nest they come across. The machine gunner as a superior position and cover behind sandbags. So what the squad does is they split up, ran in and converged on the machine gunners and attacked. One american got gunned down in the manuver but the gunners couldn't get them since they spread out and converged on their position which is what we're talking about here. If they had simply charged the gunners could have easily shot the whole unit.

I think it would be a valuable combat option to all factions. It could be a great way to make a long move to strategic cover or to get around behind an opponent when supression isn't available.

Each faction could have a different level at doing it well.
I say the corporation and animals could be the best since I have been pushing the corporation into a more mutual support style of combat. The animals could be train from birth to do it.

I think the bandits would be the worse since they are more about being strong alone.

Hmmm good idea. Maybe it could include some sort of command check to pull off a tactic like this? Perhaps a commander needs to pay a command point or the squad needs to make an experience check? That way the rule could be the same for all factions but it would still favor factions with better leadership and organization.

I'd suggest that since units are typically 6 man squads they only be allow them to divide into two groups of three or three groups of two. So either have the group split in half during the maneuver or pair off. I think having all six scatter would be a bit of mess from a logistics of play stand point.

even three sub groups may get complicated. if you have 4 squads and split them all up thats 12 groups of guys that may be difficult to keep in order and match back up with their original squad.

also there may be the issue of dealing out "orders" to these sub groups. if the command point comes from the squad leader (obviously in one of the two sub groups) does his 1 point effect the entire squad or both of the sub groups?

long story short i think it would be best if this kind of squad split up is limited to just the animals

I would guess squad size will base on the faction and the player chooses. With that there could some about how the squad can be related to the cost.

I will be using the following terms:
Tactical split - the act of splitting a squad
sub squads - the squads that are created by a tactical split a squad

Like a player using the animal faction want to do a tactical spit on a 7 member squad. He can pay command points to make 2 sub squad that are the size of 3 and 4 or since it is a animal squad he can make 3 sub squad with the size of 2, 2 and 3.

Let say a player using the reclaimers faction squad of 6. The player can only male 2 sub squads of three since the reclaimers are not well train in tactical split.

A sub squad must be made of 2 or more.

Also I say there need to be rules about how far away the sub squads can be. I say they must be within the # * movement of the other sub squads. I say unless a unit have a ability, if they are force out of distant then the smaller squad will safely work to regroup with an appropriate squad if the squads are the same size then they will both work to regroup.

This lead to a second question can two squads that lost a number of their squad can they join together? If so is there a limit to it like the squad need to be a haft starting strength?

edited to add:

Sub squads must move at the same activation when they have withing the range of squad's sub squad.

Also, I say that there is a chance that a squad can be split by enemies action or an event that happen so it would be good to have some type of rule to handle that.

Phatty wrote:even three sub groups may get complicated. if you have 4 squads and split them all up thats 12 groups of guys that may be difficult to keep in order and match back up with their original squad.

Why would you do that? If you have 4 squads it would make much more sense to use suppression to allow them to safely move rather than waste command points to have them all split up and still take enemy fire. I agree if you split your whole army it could be a huge problem but it seems like you would have to be trolling to do so. I just don't see why you would ever split your army like that unless you were trying to zerg rush the enemy in which case you would be better off charging (assuming you can charge in DP) or something like that.

If I want to use this tactic to move my troops it just makes so much more sense to split on squad and have them converge on a tactical position and then have them suppress to allow my other squads to move rather then split everyone and leave them all open to enemy fire. Using suppression when possible would save commands points and protect units better so you wouldn’t want to use this all the time. The majority of the time you would just try this when a unit really needs to try and take a position and can’t get support from another unit or move safely through cover which will happen from time to time in combat.

If you can think of a situation where you would want to split 4 squads instead of using suppression and cover please explain, maybe I’m only looking at this from one angle. I’ll admit there could be a good situation where you want to do that and I’m just not seeing it.

Phatty wrote:also there may be the issue of dealing out "orders" to these sub groups. if the command point comes from the squad leader (obviously in one of the two sub groups) does his 1 point effect the entire squad or both of the sub groups?

I don't understand what your concern is here. The commander pays the points to split the unit for this tactic when the unit is still whole.

So it would go like this:

1. My units turn comes around.
2. I declare I'm going to use this maneuver.
3. I pay two command points to split my squad into partner.
4. The three 2 man subsquads now move. Subsquads can only take move actions until the squad reforms (either by them meeting up or the other subsquads getting killed).
5. Other stuff happens. Shooting and stuff. Maybe one or even two pairs are picked off by enemy fire since presumably they don’t want to let my squad get to wherever they are trying to go and will try to kill them.
6. Eventually that other stuff resolves and my units complete their maneuver and form back up the survivors merge back into single unit and once again can take actions as a normal unit.

Phatty wrote:long story short i think it would be best if this kind of squad split up is limited to just the animals

Well like I said it is just a suggestion.

Wiouds wrote:A lot of stuff.

I basically agree, I just think it would be easiest to simpler to have the be defined in the units of the faction.

IE: It is a design rule that only animals and the corporation can triple split there squad and one simply never makes a commander for other factions who can triple split.

Wiouds wrote:Also I say there need to be rules about how far away the sub squads can be. I say they must be within the # * movement of the other sub squads. I say unless a unit have a ability, if they are force out of distant then the smaller squad will safely work to regroup with an appropriate squad if the squads are the same size then they will both work to regroup.

I agree groups must reform. The squads are supposed to move apart then converge on a single position. I think it would be easier to just say that the group must reform at the end of the maneuver and can't take any other actions accept to try and form back up until then. That way you don't have to keep measuring the distance.

Really the squads should only exist for one turn when the place executes this maneuver and reform directly after that. Subsquads shouldn't typically be hanging around cluttering up the board and causing problems unless something really crazy happens like something deep striking in right between the two groups.

The way I see it though if that happens we have only two real outcomes. One subsquad is killed making the issue of forming back up moot, or the enemy ignores the subsquads and they simply move and reform one turn later than normal.

Wiouds wrote:This lead to a second question can two squads that lost a number of their squad can they join together? If so is there a limit to it like the squad need to be a haft starting strength?

I think that is a larger question then just here as that could happen just in the normal course of combat

Wiouds wrote:edited to add:

Sub squads must move at the same activation when they have withing the range of squad's sub squad.

Also, I say that there is a chance that a squad can be split by enemies action or an event that happen so it would be good to have some type of rule to handle that.

I agree subsquads act together, they are supposed to be carrying out a synchronized maneuver. As previously said if the squads can't converge for some reason they can't take any actions except to move until they form back up.